Scrapping HS2 for those further north

But it’s not that easy to upgrade existing track. Does anyone spare a thought for the men that have to do that work? When my son worked on the railways the work was done at night but even then I think there was an incident where someone died the other year when there was a signal failure.

We aren’t all saying that Maybee70. Scrapping HS2 and reinvesting that money in upgrading and improving the existing network would give greater benefit. Pity they didn’t do that before spending the millions already spent.

The U.K. rail network wasn’t as extensively bombed during WWII in the way that European railways were which means that post war Europe rebuilt a lot of itself network. We ended up with a rail network that needed updating but hasn’t been updated to the standard of European countries. We have to use the railways for freight more. One minute everyone’s talking about global warming etc but the next minute rejoicing that something is being scrapped that could take freight off the roads and make it easier for people to travel by rail.

Scotlands bill for HS2 is upwards of 9 BILLION ...for a train thats 200-300 miles away from us .Union of equals? What a joke!

Chestnut

^In my mind HS2 is a vanity project and little use to the vast majority of people. Just another grandiose scheme and a waste of money.^
I agree, and up until now so did most people. There were a lot of complaints about it and that the money would be better spent on other neglected lines. Now suddenly everyone is moaning about it being scrapped, at least they are on the TV news. They need to look carefully at ALL areas to see what lines need upgrading or building, not just the north. I'm thinking of Wales and the south west here.

Just what I think too.?

MaizieD

Dickens

NfkDumpling

Thanks Dickens. You explained it beautifully. It must be a little more complicated as it sounds rather like printing money to me.

It must be a little more complicated as it sounds rather like printing money to me.

... It is more complicated - and I'm no economist!

But we do, actually, print money. It has to originate from somewhere... and that's the Bank of England - with their little 'printing set'. Remember those?

Ha ha!

It's all done by keystrokes on a computer now.

Money is funny stuff. It only has a real value if it can be used for transactions and it only has value if the population that uses it accepts and believes in its 'value' for transactions. It would be no use trying to use the currency of another country to buy something in the UK; no-one would accept it as it has no value here. Yet it does in the country that uses it.

Obviously a country can't go on endlessly issuing money because there would just be too much of it around and inflation would be rife. So taxation is used to return money to the issuing body (the government) to keep the level of circulating money to a manageable level.

But if the government were to stop issuing money everybody would eventually become poorer and the economy would suffer (austerity). Particularly as some people want to acquire as much as possible (seeing being 'wealthy' as more important than letting money work for everyone) and squirrel it away without paying tax on it, so taking it out of circulation.

... yes - all computerised now!

You're right, money is funny stuff - having no intrinsic value of its own. But money is also power...

“Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws” — Mayer Amschel Rothschild"

Dickens

NfkDumpling

Thanks Dickens. You explained it beautifully. It must be a little more complicated as it sounds rather like printing money to me.

It must be a little more complicated as it sounds rather like printing money to me.

... It is more complicated - and I'm no economist!

But we do, actually, print money. It has to originate from somewhere... and that's the Bank of England - with their little 'printing set'. Remember those?

Ha ha!

It's all done by keystrokes on a computer now.

Money is funny stuff. It only has a real value if it can be used for transactions and it only has value if the population that uses it accepts and believes in its 'value' for transactions. It would be no use trying to use the currency of another country to buy something in the UK; no-one would accept it as it has no value here. Yet it does in the country that uses it.

Obviously a country can't go on endlessly issuing money because there would just be too much of it around and inflation would be rife. So taxation is used to return money to the issuing body (the government) to keep the level of circulating money to a manageable level.

But if the government were to stop issuing money everybody would eventually become poorer and the economy would suffer (austerity). Particularly as some people want to acquire as much as possible (seeing being 'wealthy' as more important than letting money work for everyone) and squirrel it away without paying tax on it, so taking it out of circulation.

It all goes back to Beeching who axed the railways after being commissioned by a Tory minister with connections to the road building industry.

Corruption is endemic in the Tory Party and has done colossal harm to the public good in the UK for many many years.

I strongly agree with you MayBee70 regarding our railway ‘services’ and Europe. One feels that the railways there are for the citizens and not just a money making business. Our high cost fares are atrocious. It amazes me that we put up with it at all.
Regarding how we will be able to find funds for improving our railways, money is found soon enough for wars or royal weddings.

NfkDumpling

Thanks Dickens. You explained it beautifully. It must be a little more complicated as it sounds rather like printing money to me.

It must be a little more complicated as it sounds rather like printing money to me.

... It is more complicated - and I'm no economist!

But we do, actually, print money. It has to originate from somewhere... and that's the Bank of England - with their little 'printing set'. Remember those?

Are you being facetious growstuff, shall we all vacate Wales and Cornwall and move north to enable the HS2 phase to happen?
A better idea would be to abandon HS2 altogether and reinvest that money in improving the whole national rail network. I think you’ve displayed a lack of understanding regarding rural rail networks. For many areas the pre-Beeching infrastructure could be reinstated much more cheaply than ploughing up for HS2. Not that I’m suggesting we’re a special case as you are doing for the north east, all I’m saying is that it should be a national service which is accessible and provides a viable way of getting from A to B from wherever you live. Not pre-Beeching, but viable. For Wales, given we are the main transport link to Ireland for freight, including from the EU, that would also get hundreds of thousands of lorries off the roads.

growstuff

So what do you suggest Josianne? Criss-crossing Dartmoor with railway lines? I don't think environmentalists or residents, who have chosen to live there for the peace and quiet, would be too happy. How much do you think the real cost of each rail mile would be for the handful of passengers who would use the trains?

Not at all growstuff. I would sensibly suggest the same as Chestnut at 09.38 namely re opening the line through Tavistock to Plymouth which was closed in 1962. Totally acceptable to environmentalists.

Casdon

Electric vehicles wouldn’t provide a solution in the mountainous areas of mid Wales at any point in the foreseeable future growstuff. In any case, if it’s about disadvantaged communities having improved and faster transport links throwing one group, who have much longer travel times already under the bus to meet the needs of another isn’t the answer, there has to be improvement which benefits everybody. As I’m sure you know the level of poverty is greater in rural communities than urban ones.

They have a choice to move to more urban areas. Sorry, but many of us don't live where we would ideally choose because we've had to be practical.

Casdon

Electric vehicles wouldn’t provide a solution in the mountainous areas of mid Wales at any point in the foreseeable future growstuff. In any case, if it’s about disadvantaged communities having improved and faster transport links throwing one group, who have much longer travel times already under the bus to meet the needs of another isn’t the answer, there has to be improvement which benefits everybody. As I’m sure you know the level of poverty is greater in rural communities than urban ones.

So do you really suggest blasting routes for rail rack through mountainous areas?

So what do you suggest Josianne? Criss-crossing Dartmoor with railway lines? I don't think environmentalists or residents, who have chosen to live there for the peace and quiet, would be too happy. How much do you think the real cost of each rail mile would be for the handful of passengers who would use the trains?

I agree about rural communities Casdon. In order to attract, or even keep, people in these towns there needs to be positives: easy, fast travel to work being one. If you live slap bang in the middle of Devon for example and need to get to Plymouth to work or study, (say the hospital or university), the 30 mile journey can take up to 2 hours at times due to heavy traffic, and winding, dangerous roads over Dartmoor.

Electric vehicles wouldn’t provide a solution in the mountainous areas of mid Wales at any point in the foreseeable future growstuff. In any case, if it’s about disadvantaged communities having improved and faster transport links throwing one group, who have much longer travel times already under the bus to meet the needs of another isn’t the answer, there has to be improvement which benefits everybody. As I’m sure you know the level of poverty is greater in rural communities than urban ones.

growstuff

Barmeyoldbat

Grow stuff the decision on what a community needs should not be decided by they contribute but by their needs.

Sorry! I don't think I suggested otherwise, did I?

The total needs of a densely populated area are many times greater than the needs of a sparsely populated area.

Casdon

That’s okay then growstuff, we know we aren’t important in Wales and Cornwall, our populations are too small. Seriously?

Yes, seriously. Trains are expensive and only viable if there are enough passengers. Laying track and setting up the infrastructure costs a fortune, as the original railway builders found out, many to their cost.

The needs of Liverpool/Manchester, Manchester/Leeds or Leeds/Bradford etc commuters just can't be compared with the situation in mid Wales or Cornwall.

The needs of rural communities might very well be better served better by efficient electric buses, which could, if necessary, connect with trains.

Barmeyoldbat

Grow stuff the decision on what a community needs should not be decided by they contribute but by their needs.

Sorry! I don't think I suggested otherwise, did I?

Thanks Dickens. You explained it beautifully. It must be a little more complicated as it sounds rather like printing money to me.

Grow stuff the decision on what a community needs should not be decided by they contribute but by their needs.

I remember fondly an elderly lady interviewed on tv when HS2 was being mooted.
On being told that the new route/trains would cut ?90 minutes from the London to Birmingham journey time, she paused in thought for a moment.

Couldn't they just get an earlier train?, she asked...

That’s okay then growstuff, we know we aren’t important in Wales and Cornwall, our populations are too small. Seriously?

Ooops! I meant to write "it isn't only the eastern branch ..."